Talk:Peoples' Democratic Party (Turkey)/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Midnightblueowl (talk · contribs) 22:06, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
This is an article on an interesting subject. I'll have a go at reviewing it if I may. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:06, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
- Nicely written lede. Generally the prose throughout the article is clear and well composed. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:17, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
- There are chunks of text, for instance within the "Peoples' Democratic Congress" and "June 2015 general election" sections, which are totally unreferenced and which could represent WP:Original Research. These all need to be fully referenced. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:17, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
- "Capitalism" should be rendered in lower-case. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:17, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
- There are various instances containing text that needs to be more specific. For instance "The HDP is seen as the Turkish variant..." (seen by who?) or "Concerns have been raised whether" (raised by who?). This needs to be dealt with. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:17, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
- The references are not formatted uniformly, and are in a bit of a mess, generally. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:17, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
- I have serious concerns about the lack of academic references here. Surely political scientists have written about this party and published their research in peer-reviewed journals? If so, those would certainly be the best sources for us to use, rather than the various press sources and primary sources currently used. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:17, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
- At present, the various issues with this article would mark it out as a clear fail at GA level, however if these issues can be smoothed out in the next week or so then it is possible that this could be brought up to the status where it might merit a pass. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:17, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
A week has passed, with no improvement made. I'm afraid that this is going to have to be a fail at this stage. Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:08, 8 January 2016 (UTC)